As someone who wishes you well and to see you prevail - since you seem to contain most of the real Christains in the RCC; I suggest that you ought to argue positively for what you really believe: that the Tridentine Latin Mass is superior to the vernacular Novus Ordo Mass.
This does not mean that the vernacular Mass should be forbidden altogether - nor that those who want the Vernacular/ New Order should not be able to have it; but that its inferiority ought to be officially recognized - and the Novus Ordo should be 'tolerated' rather than approved.
I say this because I have too-often seen supporters of the Latin Mass using the same kind of 'negative' (indeed liberal) arguments used by supporters of 'free speech'.
In other words, Latin Mass advocates too-often try to be value-neutral about the two forms of the Mass.
They try to avoid stating that either form is superior - and try to to take a line that says both Masses are equivalent, and ought to be 'equally' tolerated.
Such an argument is wrong; because decades of experience has demonstrated (if it was ever in doubt) that there can be no such thing as value-neutrality: things are either good or bad; and if there are two different forms one must (and will, in practice!) be acknowledged as better than the other.
So to argue negatively, from a statement of value-neutrality is both inaccurate, and ineffective.
Therefore, the Tridentine Latin Mass should be supported as explicitly the superior and preferable form.